Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Send Topic Print
Voting by delegable proxy (Read 63605 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #45 - Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:08pm
 
There seems to be a bit of confusion over the technical details of how this works, so I have updated the introduction to the article:

Voting by delegable proxy is a form of direct democracy that allows the entire voting population to vote on each bill before parliament by electing a sitting member to vote on their behalf. Rather than voting directly on a bill, you delegate your vote to a sitting member of parliament who casts your vote on your behalf. You can change your delegate as often as you like and be as active in the political process as you wish. Those who wish to be less involved can keep the same delegate indefinitely, and their delegate will continue to cast votes on their behalf. This would ease the burden of voting as there would be no requirement to make everyone vote regularly and at the same time in order to achieve a parliament that represents the wishes of the people. Alternatively, those who wish to become more involved can change their delegate as often as is necessary to ensure that their vote is cast as they desire.

Rather than sitting members of parliament casting one equal vote each, they cast all the votes of the people who have delegated their vote to them. So a sitting member may represent 1 million voters and thus cast one million votes on their behalf, presumably in the same way (either all in favour of the bill or all opposed). Out of a voting population of 10 million, such a member would hold 10% of the political power in the house. Five or six such members could form government by holding over 50% of the power in the house, and by representing over 50% of eligible voters.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 71950
Gender: male
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #46 - Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:17pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 15th, 2013 at 9:53pm:
Quote:
if on every major issue , the health ministers proxy changes to a new player


How would that happen John?

Quote:
You cannot change ministers every few months or nothing gets done.


There is no reason why this would happen.


This whole system is new to me and I'm unsure how it works, but didn't you say earlier if one representative losses the proxy of the majority, the person with the highest % of proxies becomes the new respresentatives ... what happens if that person happens to be a minister with a portofolio? For example, if when, say Nicola Roxon, looses the proxy of the majority when she first announces the plain packaging legislation because the public decides they don't want to do that, don't we than need a new health minister? It seems you have the potential to chop and change on every major issue
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #47 - Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:20pm
 
You should read the update I posted just above your post.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 71950
Gender: male
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #48 - Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:23pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:20pm:
You should read the update I posted just above your post.


SO you have to choose one of the current MP's as your proxy on each issue? In that case we still need to hold general elections don't we? Didn't I read earlier there will be no need to hold general elections ?

I think I'm missing something .... I'll have to go through the whole thread again tomorrow to see if it makes more sense ...
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #49 - Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:35pm
 
Quote:
SO you have to choose one of the current MP's as your proxy on each issue?


Not necessarily.

Quote:
In that case we still need to hold general elections don't we?


No.

There are several ways to handle the replacement of sitting members of parliament. Basically, whichever member has fewest votes is at risk of getting replaced by an aspiring candidate with more votes. I didn't go into detail because there are a lot of different ways to handle it. Some options for achieving this in practice are:

1) 'Preferential' delegation - you can delegate your vote to someone who is not a sitting member, provided you give another preference to someone who is. If the aspiring candidate has more first preference votes than the worst performing sitting member, he replaces them. In practice, a second preference would be a good idea in case your delegate retires or dies suddenly.

2) Redelegation - you can delegate your vote to someone who is not a sitting member, but until they achieve membership they must redelegate your vote to a sitting member. Under this system, there could be many more people holding blocks of votes, and the only real difference that being a sitting member makes is that you get paid. Again, as soon as the aspiring member has more delegated votes than the worst performing sitting member, he replaces them.

All this happens at the small end of town. If we assume the house has only 20 members, they would have 4% of votes each on average. In practice, some would have 10% or 20%, and the tail enders would have far less than 1% of the vote each. Coalitions would most likely form with stable members or members with high percentages of the votes. Thus, replacement of an MP is unlikely to change the balance of power, especially when you consider that the same people are voting and their votes will most likely be redelgated to people who will vote the same way.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Peter Freedman
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 5275
Wellington
Gender: male
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #50 - Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:57pm
 
Sorry, FD but I find your responses increasingly hard to follow.

You say it is impossible for my vote to go to some candidate I don't want to win.

Okay, say there are five candidates. I want number five to win so I rate him my first preference. He finishes last so my vote is transferred to my second preference, say number four. But I didn't want four to win, I wanted five. So how can you say my vote cannot go to someone I didn't support?

Second issue: look at my example where 5 preferences had to be used to get a result. If the winning candidate was my lowest preference, then haven't I voted for the candidate I least wanted to win?
Back to top
 

God grant me the patience to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and, above all, the wisdom to tell the difference.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #51 - Jan 16th, 2013 at 8:38am
 
Quote:
Okay, say there are five candidates. I want number five to win so I rate him my first preference. He finishes last so my vote is transferred to my second preference, say number four. But I didn't want four to win, I wanted five.


Out of a pool of four candidates, you want number 4 to win. You get your wish. This is no different to if you turned up at the polls and there were only 4 candidates on the ballot paper, especially when you consider that your first preference had no hope of winning. The Americans call it instant runoff voting, because that is what it is - a series of elections with a decreasing pool of candidates.

Quote:
Second issue: look at my example where 5 preferences had to be used to get a result. If the winning candidate was my lowest preference, then haven't I voted for the candidate I least wanted to win?


No. In this case the final runoff election would be between your least preferred candidate and some other candidate. Your vote would be with that other candidate, against your least preferred candidate. You don't 'win' but your vote is represented exactly how you intended.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Peter Freedman
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 5275
Wellington
Gender: male
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #52 - Jan 16th, 2013 at 11:49am
 
Okay, I follow your argument, though it does remind me somewhat of Lewis Carroll.

Another question: Do you have to mark preferences, or can you just vote for one candidate?
Back to top
 

God grant me the patience to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and, above all, the wisdom to tell the difference.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #53 - Jan 16th, 2013 at 1:14pm
 
Quote:
Another question: Do you have to mark preferences, or can you just vote for one candidate?


We have just been discussing the current preferential voting system. Perhaps that is the reason for much of the confusion - we have also been discussing the merits of FPP, preferential, PR and MMR systems.

I will assume that your question refers to voting by delegable proxy:

You can design it however you want. Obviously your vote needs to end up somewhere. However, even combining it with compulsory voting is not absolutely necessary - that is a separate issue.

You could for example allow people to vote directly on a bill, rather than using their delegate, if they wanted to. You could allow aspiring members do this with blocks of proxy votes under some of the alternatives I put forward.

I would be in favour of making at least some preferences mandatory, just for practical reasons - eg if your first preference has a heart attack. However this is not the same concept as our current preferential voting system, although it is very similar in the case where your first preference is not (yet) a sitting member.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Peter Freedman
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 5275
Wellington
Gender: male
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #54 - Jan 16th, 2013 at 4:32pm
 
FD, I meant can you just mark one candidate in the current preferential system?
Back to top
 

God grant me the patience to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and, above all, the wisdom to tell the difference.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #55 - Jan 16th, 2013 at 6:27pm
 
It depends what state you are in. It is called optional preferential voting, though 'compulsory-optional' is a more representative term. I think QLD and NSW use it for state elections. It introduces some problems, because preferential voting is essentially a series of runoff elections, so you end up with compulsory votes competing against optional ones.

Here is an article I wrote about it:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/electoral-reform/optional-preferential-voting.html
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
gold_medal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #56 - Jan 17th, 2013 at 5:13pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 15th, 2013 at 10:08pm:
There seems to be a bit of confusion over the technical details of how this works, so I have updated the introduction to the article:

Voting by delegable proxy is a form of direct democracy that allows the entire voting population to vote on each bill before parliament by electing a sitting member to vote on their behalf. Rather than voting directly on a bill, you delegate your vote to a sitting member of parliament who casts your vote on your behalf. You can change your delegate as often as you like and be as active in the political process as you wish. Those who wish to be less involved can keep the same delegate indefinitely, and their delegate will continue to cast votes on their behalf. This would ease the burden of voting as there would be no requirement to make everyone vote regularly and at the same time in order to achieve a parliament that represents the wishes of the people. Alternatively, those who wish to become more involved can change their delegate as often as is necessary to ensure that their vote is cast as they desire.

Rather than sitting members of parliament casting one equal vote each, they cast all the votes of the people who have delegated their vote to them. So a sitting member may represent 1 million voters and thus cast one million votes on their behalf, presumably in the same way (either all in favour of the bill or all opposed). Out of a voting population of 10 million, such a member would hold 10% of the political power in the house. Five or six such members could form government by holding over 50% of the power in the house, and by representing over 50% of eligible voters.


you seem to have missed a rather vital point. what if for every bill that comes up for debate you need to change your delegate? the chances of an MP agreeing with someone all the time is limited. and if enough people felt the same then an MP could be in and out and in and out every few weeks. That would be rather useles if that MP happend to be and MP or minister.

It isnt so much that the idea is daft, but rather that it is absolutely impractical and requires a far, far higher level of involvement from an already apathetic electorate. Failing that it becomes nothing more than a minority groups plaything and govt is rendered ineffective.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gold_medal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #57 - Jan 17th, 2013 at 5:19pm
 
it doesnt get much more complex that this idea.

give me optional Preferential and I think most objections are covered. My only other problem with preferential is when a primary vote leader is overtaken in the end by someone 10+% behind. I think that is wrong. The notion of a sceond preference having equal weight to a first is inequitable and incorect. The simplistic notion that preferences are actually genuine is also rather ludicrous. with 80% of voters voting off the party plan and parties choosing their preferences strategically rather than ethically, it renders most preferences many things, but certianly not a real view of the electorate.

Thats why if we must have 'run-off' then dont use this system. NOBODY thinks of preferential voting as run-offs.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #58 - Jan 17th, 2013 at 6:25pm
 
Quote:
what if for every bill that comes up for debate you need to change your delegate?


Then you change your delegate. Or don;t bother. It is your choice. Though it seems unlikely as there are only two possible ways to vote on each bill (excluding abstention), and a lot of members to cast their vote one way or the other, so there is going to be quite a few who vote your way into the forseeable future. In any case, even it is does not turn out to be perfect, it is a hell of a lot better than the current system, which only lets you change your mind once every few years and only gives you two effective choices anyway.

Quote:
the chances of an MP agreeing with someone all the time is limited


Actually I think it is quite high. Remember, the house will not be dominated by two parties, but by a variety of members with different platforms. If you want more choice, increase the number of members. Also, there is usually only about one bill per year that the majority take a real interest in.

Quote:
and if enough people felt the same then an MP could be in and out and in and out every few weeks


I have included provisions for this in the article. I should have it online soon. A member on the verge of ejection is hardly going to be appointed to a ministerial position.

Quote:
It isnt so much that the idea is daft, but rather that it is absolutely impractical and requires a far, far higher level of involvement from an already apathetic electorate.


It does not require it at all. In fact it requires less involvement than the current system. You are confusing the fact that it permits more involvement with requiring this involvement. Compare this with our current system, where you are stuck with the same candidate for many years, and if you don't like how he votes, there is nothing you can do about it. Even worse, the majority of the population do not even support their representative. They disagree with him before he even gets into parliament. To make it even worse, when your 3 or 4 year sentence is up, guess how much say you have then? None, because the same fool gets back in again.

Also, permitting more involvement will actually make the community less apathetic.

Quote:
Failing that it becomes nothing more than a minority groups plaything and govt is rendered ineffective.


How so? It is still only one vote each. No minority can force the majority to vote their way, because ultimately it comes down to how the people vote, not how the politicians vote. The people will withdraw their support from mainstream candidates in droves if they start supporting the wrong things. There is a level of accountability there that does not exist in our current system. That is the benefit of the system.

Quote:
The notion of a sceond preference having equal weight to a first is inequitable and incorrect.


No it isn't. It is the principle of one person, one vote.

Quote:
Thats why if we must have 'run-off' then dont use this system. NOBODY thinks of preferential voting as run-offs.


That is because they misunderstand the system. But in reality, that is what it is.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
gold_medal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male
Re: Voting by delegable proxy
Reply #59 - Jan 17th, 2013 at 7:56pm
 
freediver wrote on Jan 17th, 2013 at 6:25pm:
Quote:
what if for every bill that comes up for debate you need to change your delegate?


Then you change your delegate. Or don;t bother. It is your choice. Though it seems unlikely as there are only two possible ways to vote on each bill (excluding abstention), and a lot of members to cast their vote one way or the other, so there is going to be quite a few who vote your way into the forseeable future. In any case, even it is does not turn out to be perfect, it is a hell of a lot better than the current system, which only lets you change your mind once every few years and only gives you two effective choices anyway.

Quote:
the chances of an MP agreeing with someone all the time is limited


Actually I think it is quite high. Remember, the house will not be dominated by two parties, but by a variety of members with different platforms. If you want more choice, increase the number of members. Also, there is usually only about one bill per year that the majority take a real interest in.

Quote:
and if enough people felt the same then an MP could be in and out and in and out every few weeks


I have included provisions for this in the article. I should have it online soon. A member on the verge of ejection is hardly going to be appointed to a ministerial position.

Quote:
It isnt so much that the idea is daft, but rather that it is absolutely impractical and requires a far, far higher level of involvement from an already apathetic electorate.


It does not require it at all. In fact it requires less involvement than the current system. You are confusing the fact that it permits more involvement with requiring this involvement. Compare this with our current system, where you are stuck with the same candidate for many years, and if you don't like how he votes, there is nothing you can do about it. Even worse, the majority of the population do not even support their representative. They disagree with him before he even gets into parliament. To make it even worse, when your 3 or 4 year sentence is up, guess how much say you have then? None, because the same fool gets back in again.

Also, permitting more involvement will actually make the community less apathetic.

Quote:
Failing that it becomes nothing more than a minority groups plaything and govt is rendered ineffective.


How so? It is still only one vote each. No minority can force the majority to vote their way, because ultimately it comes down to how the people vote, not how the politicians vote. The people will withdraw their support from mainstream candidates in droves if they start supporting the wrong things. There is a level of accountability there that does not exist in our current system. That is the benefit of the system.

Quote:
The notion of a sceond preference having equal weight to a first is inequitable and incorrect.


No it isn't. It is the principle of one person, one vote.

Quote:
Thats why if we must have 'run-off' then dont use this system. NOBODY thinks of preferential voting as run-offs.


That is because they misunderstand the system. But in reality, that is what it is.


FD I would normally consider you are fairly bright person, but this idea is dumb for about 100 reasons - none of which you understand. Who in their right mind would want to be an MP under this system?  They have no say in how they vote. they have no career path because it could be cut sort every couple weeks  and the only people driving policy agendas would be minorities.

Gve it up FD. Nice try but the concept is too flawed to even be considered. You have such a love of minorities you would do anything to ensure they get their unfair say. the idea scores 1/100 and that one is only for originality. BTW a dictatorship scores 2. at least under that system there would be an actual govt.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Send Topic Print